In terms of numbers, Green-Left ideologues are marginal. But they punch far above their weight. Their mission is plant preconceptions about eco-Malthusians in the minds of grass roots environmentalists and those few in the media would invite our input. Left unchallenged, this bad rap becomes conventional wisdom, and doors continue to slam in our faces. And these New McCarthyists know it. It is time we gave them a dose of their own medicine. We must expose their corporate funding sources and ask the obvious questions. Whose agenda are THEY serving? Whose interest is served by open borders? Are not the "eco-socialists" and "green" Trots Wall Street's useful idiots?

A SENIOR Treasury official has sounded the alarm over Australia's property market.
He has warned that the prospect of a sudden and dramatic drop in prices is "the elephant in the room" and should not be ignored by the federal government.

The so-called 'skills shortage' in Australia is mere industry propaganda to avoid training costs. This is despite Australia have an advanced industralised base and a deep capacity as an education training nation and indeed exporter of education!
Yes, government and industry bleat unsubstantiated a 'skills shortage' so they can bring more and more immigrants for selfish short term economic ends while avoid financial cost of education and training locally and moral obligations to do so.

Mining companies are the worst. Their international ring-in approach sourcing foreign contractors suits mining companies to a tee - no give and all take!

Film and text of speech now available inside article. Speech given at Planning Backlash Forum of 7 Nov 2010: "In July last year I made a 22 page submission to the Victorian Government titled “5 Million is too many: Securing the Social and Environmental Future of Melbourne”. So given that I think 5 million would be too many, you can imagine what I think of the idea of doubling Melbourne’s population to 8 million. Melbourne’s population is growing on a scale not seen in Australia before, swelling by almost 150,000 people in the last two years. Melbourne’s population is growing by more than 200 people per day, 1500 per week, 75,000 per year. This is much faster than all other major Australian cities. It will give us another million people in 15 years."

There is an unrelenting media campaign to tell Canadians that we must grow our population. We need more babies and more immigrants or very bad things will happen. But there are voices that question this assumption. They are heard on the streets, in the pubs and at the dining room table. But they are seldom heard in the media. Especially not on the airways of the CBC, that vehicle of growthist PC propaganda which all taxpayers are forced to endow.

Our schizophrenic environmental movement and its parliamentary voice, the Green Party, continues to make the Alberta Tar Sands Project the focus of its wrath. But the ongoing ecological disaster of mass immigration is completely off their radar screen. In fact, the federal Greens advocate an immigration intake 25% higher than the current Conservative government's. Like the vast majority of Greens across the world, they see no essential relationship between population growth and environmental degradation. So how does the Tar Sands project compare to immigration in the one measurement that Greens almost exclusively regard as an index of ecological impact---carbon emissions?

Australia's alternating Liberal/Labor (Laboral) governments accept all comers because they have become conditioned to be fearful of the racist slur automatically cast by immigrant lobby groups like the Federation of Ethnic Communities' Councils of Australia.

Australia's mass media is constantly bombarded by propaganda condemning any criticism of immigrants or any calls to reduce immigration. And guess who's driving the propaganda - the immigrants who want more of their country folk arriving and who protest 'stuff assimilation - we'll retain our nationality in Australia!

The 'Laboral'* policy of immigrant favouritism is Reverse Racism. It is discriminatory against local people and their traditional way of life. It is cultural treason. In Australia, when an immigrant gets into a position of influence (management, politics), favouritism handed to the immigrant's countrymen and women (i.e. jobs) should not be ignored by Australia's anti-discrimination laws, but it is. Minority groups have become the darlings of anti-discrimination and can do no wrong in the eyes of politically correct law makers.

But immigrant favouritism is a dangerous policy that has already undermined social cohesion in Australia. Cronulla in 2005 was a warning to governments. Heed it and curb the immigration and listen to the locals!

Prime Minister Stephen Harper of Canada has happened upon the John Howard confidence trick. In the shell game of electoral politics, it is important to get the audience to focus on the pea marked "bogus refugees" rather than the one marked "unsustainable immigration". That way corporations get the policy they paid for. The growth of the cheap labour pool and legions of new consumers. We clap our hands at the crackdown, and are none the wiser for it.

https://candobetter.net/sites/default/files/Frank Bainimarama.jpg" vspace="3" hspace="3" align="left">Nationalism is a domestic reaction to foreign invasion (be it militarily or by mass immigration) and the consequential displacement of the local population - real or perceived.

Foreigners visiting are guests and are welcome. But foreigners arriving as permanent settlers threaten to compete with the territory and rights of the local ancestral population - again, real or perceived. So any immigration program warrants prior approval by the local population, and sensitive and respectful settling, adjustment, communication and time and space for assimilation to integrate.

The effect of immigration on the employment of Canadians became a bit clearer this week. On the Tuesday, Sept 14 edition of CBC Radio's The Current, Economics Professor Eric Howe stated that 1 in 7 Aboriginal Canadians in Saskatchewan lost their jobs in 2009. Mr. Howe is a specialist in Aboriginal issues and teaches at the University of Saskatchewan in Saskatoon. He described the job loss as "an utter disaster" for Aboriginals. He said a number of factors had caused this to happen. One was that the Saskatchewan job market slowed in 2009. Another was that the Saskatchewan provincial government was at that time "pushing the hiring of immigrants at the cost of hiring people already here".

For too long the immigration program has been out of public control and run purely for the interests of an elite number of business groups and portions of a pro-ethnic lobby who are both quick to throw the term "racist" or "nimby" when their their interests aren't pandered to.

Sex is a voluntary act, therefore children are discretionary.
In an already grossly overcrowded planet, the human motivation to have many children in order to support a family is a backward primitive tradition that is an unsustainable, selfish burden and impost on the planet. But it is clearly the responsibility of governments to control.

The key problem is that delinquent governments ignoring their family size excesses and their population excesses keep receiving generous hand outs from the global community such as the United Nations and the World Bank - as if to confirm - it's ok, keep breeding!

Australia's greatest social, environmental and economic problems are 'root driven' by immigrated human overpopulation. Both Gillard's & Abbott's 'sustainable population' is hollow headline spin. Both are committed to economic growth, because they know no better. Both are committed to encouraging skilled immigration because if is a cheaper bandaid measure for industries not prepared to invest in local vocational training. So what political parties have a serious policy commitment to stemming Australia's harmful excessive immigration?

If Gillard is not a rehash of the hollow Rudd, who hoodwinked us into the false hope of the 2007 pork barrelling and spun that hollow 2020 Summit; Gillard's absence of maxims and deadlines for Australia's population/immigration targets only confirms voters ought to presume more of the same.

Ordinary voters need to detox from this election bender.

Only the political parties, their advertisers and their media allies stand to benefit - like clubs that own the pokies.

ABC TV's Tony Jones' current affairs debate this evening provided firstly prominent Australian, Dick Smith, with a heart felt concern about the uncontrolled, unplanned immigration surge impacting Australia, then a rigorous but too brief a debate from nevertheless a fair cross section of what appeared to be informed observers. Useful issues were presented from many quarters.

One key observation is that Dick Smith, who dared to initiate the debate and invest much in the documentary, insightfully concluded that at least Australia is mature enough to start publicly debating the subject. What needs to be thought through next is a national plan for population into the medium term future. Well done Dick Smith for your leadership on this critical issue!

1. They exclude those not ideologically 'green', so alienation keeps them alienated from the mainstream

2. They do not translate their idealistic ideology into pragmatic shovel-ready policy initiatives with dollar values and immediate costed implementation plans; so they remain perceived as a futurist think tank, not regarded as a real-time alternative executive government.

It is inconsistent that a small neck Christian cross worn by British nurse Shirley Chaplin could be health risk to patients, while bangles, head scarves and long sleeves worn by Sikh and Muslim nurses at the same hospital are magically somehow 'exempt' and considered no health risk.Cods wallop! The spirit and goals of UK's Equality Act 2010 are supposed to be fair and equitable. Last time I visited Britain it was a predominantly Christian society.

Immigrants rejecting cultural assimilation with the local population are unwelcome invaders by definition. Newcomers by rejecting adoption of the local culture, are disrespectfully asserting an unjustified claim to establish and impose a foreign culture. Such is an invasion, albeit short of armed conflict or what colonists euphemistically term 'annexing', but that is only difference.

Immigrants seeking 'a new life' in Australia or New Zealand have a moral obligation to respect and adopt the ways of life of the local inhabitants of Australia and New Zealand respectively, not to impose their previous ways of life upon their new hosts. It is for the host country to facilitate and support that assimilation, not to abandon people.

It has been said that the latest influx of immigrants is of different mentality than those who preceded them. Immigrants of an earlier generation, according to this sentiment, were anxious to join in and fuse with the mainstream culture, but immigrants now feel no such impulse. Rather, it is argued, they wish to nestle in the warm bosom of a neighbourhood or enclave of those of similar ethnicity and remain distinct and seperate from the mainstream culture. This is a perilous assumption.

Successive Lib/Lab common ideology in Australia has migrant students displacing domestic students.

Aside from the millions in export revenue from overseas students' cash making balance of trade figures look good, what social and moral justification could there possible be for favouring migrant students to take up tertiary places over Australia's own?

The Australian Growth Lobby has only a couple of primitive weapons - calling the PM a racist and misrepresenting the figures. The other side has all the good arguments, as well as truth on its side. This article analyses the childish statistical misrepresentation and social innuendo in the 5 July 2010 Australian Financial Review editorial, "PM's own goal on population."

There is now a surfeit of "green living" tips that adorn the websites of environmental NGOs and corporations alike, all eager to tell the carbon-obsessed how much more responsible they can be by changing their consumer habits. Conspiculously absent, however, is any suggestion that you might limit your family to one child or that the Minister of Immigration might change his lifestyle of opening the floodgates to incoming footprints from other lands so that they can multiply their ecological impacts upon arrival. The whole exercise is classic displacement behaviour---a feel good distraction from the nasty task at hand: keeping our numbers down.

For those who follow the stock exchange, building materials share values are the key to the boom and bust cycle of Australian (and similar systems) property, infrastructure and construction booms. When building materials values go down we know that overall market demand decline has settled in. It means that the developers and engineers have reduced their forward orders for bricks and mortar. At the same time the States have been told to reduce their own little-known immigrant-sponsorship programs.

Since the slogan ''populate or perish'' was coined during World War II we have forged a consensus that a growing Australian population is mainly good for national prosperity.
The populate or perish policy is nothing new, of course. Under various guises, it has driven growth in Australia for more than 200 years. However, those who argue that big population equals better everything are wrong.

Kevin Rudd and his Federal Government ministers have lately taken to uttering the catch-cry that they "want Australia to be a place that makes things". However, this will not happen in a world of slave-labour economies, until the abandonment of protectionism, supported by both the major Australian political parties, is reversed.

As was reported in the Melbourne Age of 9 May 2010, the Anglican church has rightly called for both a decrease in natural population growth and a decrease in Australia's current record high rate of immigration. The Citizens Electoral Council, which believes that not only Australia, but the whole world, is underpopulated, responded, on 11 May 2010, with one of its typical hyperbolic media releases.The Anglican Church General Synod paper can be downladed from here (pdf 277K),See also the original paper released for comment by the Anglican Church.

In urban Canada, we have imported a slave labour caste and condemned them for their apparent inability or unwillingness to assimilate. The truth is, they want to become Canadians, but are too exhausted and pre-occupied with survival to become full participants in mainstream society. The irony is, they are victims of their own arrival. Immigrant-driven population growth has inflated housing costs to the point that they must run even faster and longer than other Canadians to eke out an insufficient living. The solution is cross-cultural solidarity, but higher wages for shorter hours is its prerequisite.